Littering Argument Essay

1257 Words 6 Pages
Littering is illegal and penalties vary from state to state, because it causes great harm to the environment. On May 11th, 2012, an ad created by the Surfrider Foundation depicts why littering is dangerous and unhealthy for the oceans, and also for humans. The ad contains an image of sushi wrapped in a plastic brown bag embedded with more plastic, rather than seaweed and fish. A pair of chopsticks lie beside the sushi as if someone were preparing to ingest it. In blue, capitalized, and printed largely on the ad, it states, “What goes in the ocean goes in you” (Surfrider). In other words, Surf Rider Foundation believes that what people are throwing in the oceans will come back to them in their meals. Below the quote, it states statistics on how much fish are estimated to ingest plastic off the …show more content…
This could be from the fondness of seafood to the well-being of marine life. The message that the foundation is conveying informs people that they are littering redundantly. They want people to acknowledge what is thrown into the ocean, because it is life threatening. For example, a fish indulges a large piece of plastic. It is then caught and cut up for consumption. According to the Surf Foundation, the plastic consumed by the fish carries organic pollutants such as DDT, PCBS, mercury and other toxins (“What goes into the ocean”). Without awareness of the fish’s whereabouts, consumption of this fish may lead to crucial health problems. Not just the fish, but the person who ate it and the environment around the fish is now in danger. Some assumptions that the ad makes about the audience is that they are close by the coastlines and liter quite often. As mentioned in pathos, the ad makes it seem like the audience is at fault. The only way the audience would be at fault is if they visit the ocean and liter frequently. Therein, there is an impression of accusation on the audience for being

Related Documents